Damn Liberal High School MediaFollow

Since he had that nasty run in with the telemarketing scam. Face it the dude is broke and a rally is just what he needs to lift his spirits and help him get back on his feet.



As far as the video, I like the idea of making a new one ever 10 years or so and using highschool students to make it. It would hopefully reflect the current ideals and hope that they have. As far as to editing it, I say ***** that if they did not get involved in the project on the first run don't go back and second guess the **** out of it.

I'm not saying that they're dumb (well, some are) but that no one should go to high school students for political views and then be surprised that they're overwhelmingly liberal.

The old joke is that nearly everyone is liberal until they get married and buy a house. Then they become conservatives.

You mean the dude on the TV is not Jesus. God Dammit I hate it when they lie to me. Guess it is back to internet Buddha for me.

Jesus' was not a crazed psycho. Get off the wagon.






Y'know I was in Salem, Mass one year for Halloween, and this Christian was walking around passing out Save YOur Soul stickers and ****...

So these Non-Chistians surround him and start screaming at him about how "his kind" was responsible for these innocent deaths and blahbahb and they seemed fairly close to lynching his ***..

at this point I was forced to stand on a wall near them and began shouting hat they were hypocrites for accosting this Chistian, as they were doing the same thing that they were shouting at him for. Eventually they left him alone and the guy tried to save My sould. I told him to get the fu[b][/b]ck outa my face.





but Jesus wasn't a crazed psycho any more than Ghandi was.

my point?

I like to ramble and rant about this **** for some godforsaken reason.

Gotta love how people are glorified pigs at a trough.

Edited, Fri Jul 1 12:12:17 2005 by Kelvyquayo

It's been there for 11 years and it's only a problem now? Bunch of social recidivists feeling kinda butt hurt over recent non-extreme-right decisions?

Hey, I was just talking about Jesus.. not the rest of the Bible. Yeah, it is indeed savage and self-contradicting.

And I'm not going to defend foreign traditions... but keep in mind the time that they were living in... I'd say everyone would have been a certified wacko 2000 years ago compared to todays standards.


..and waht's your first language if I may be nosey?

Maybe not.

just remember that you're are viewing it all from the modern eye. We possible cannot imagine how normal people thought of such things back then.

I think to call yourself "Son of God" back then was a pretty normal thing. Like saying we are all "Children of Earth" or somthing..
prolly normal everyday hippy talk for the era.


The message was pretty much, "There's more after Death, doing Good makes it all better" period

All of the "Only in My Name" stuff... well... that's another story.. there are other Gospels that will contradict this....

I don't remember that part.. but if you say so.

Although can't imagine anything in the Bible that would be detrimental to the "Faith". If it says that he lost follower, then it was prolly to prove a point or to show an example of more people "refusing the head corner-stone" or somthing.



Really, I've agreed with you the whole time.... the whole flesh/blood thing is pretty odd.... but then again so is life.

I can understand the heavy symbolism and how that would effect the mentallity of people... Especially people of That era.

The NEA has been very liberal, traditionally.

Sooo, which one is the sock and which one is the main anyways?
99609 TheTree
330553 DriftTimmay
251530 azawinsky
302522 Telleah
368800 xXMalevolentXx
481382 Rockbiter
477386 BrownRecluse
536539 TimInEm

Ok. I see several misconceptions going on in this thread.

First off. I also agree that most HS students are going to intentionally bias something. However, I do believe that most HS teachers *are*. Since that's often where the HS students get their direction, it's naturally going to appear when they express themselves.

If every single "significant social event" covered in this years US history class was about gay rights, abortion rights, MLK marches, etc, then naturally that's what the students are going to put together in a video when asked to make one about significant social events, right? Doesn't require any intention to bias at all.


Additionally, Joph was asking if it was ok to edit it. My response is that it's presumably already been edited, right? Did a group of HS students make the entire thing? Or did HS students from around the country submit clips and then the Park Service edited them together into an 8 minute documentary? If the latter, then it's entirely possible that there were lots of submissions that included "conservative viewpoints", but that were not included in the final product because the Park Service (run by a Democratic administration at the time, right) may have chosen to only include issues and agendas favorable to the current administration. If that is the case (which I would strongly suspect), then it's not unreasonable at all for a Conservative administration to re-edit it to include images favorable to his side, right?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.


Finally, it's not about freedom of speech. You have every freedom to make a video documentary. You have every freedom to show that video. But you don't have some "right" to have it shown as an "official" documentary to every visitor to a public monument (paid for by the public's dime no less). That freedom is reserved for the Park Service, right? Ultimately, those who run the monument have the choice as to what is shown at the monument. It in no way infringes on anyone's freedom of speech if the video is changed, removed, replaced, etc. It's totally up to those who run the monument. Not a group of HS students.